Talk:Judges
Just a thought, but should we add each series' Judges to the info boxes on the right series pages, eg. it goes Presented by:, Commentary by: and then Judges:? Llamaman201 (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC) :That's not a bad idea. You're quite welcome to go ahead and add them if you so wish. Christophee (talk) 11:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC) ::Okay, I'll do series 1, 2 and 3, I'm not sure about the others. Llamaman201 (talk) 14:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC) :::It's all in the judges section on the main Robot Wars page if you need to know who was in each series. Christophee (talk) 13:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC) ::::Ah thanks, but also how do i put it in because I typed the names in, previewed and nothing happened, do I need to do something different than just a regular edit? Llamaman201 (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC) :::::I'll edit the template for you so that it actually shows up on the infobox. Christophee (talk) 15:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC) Defining "Controversial" OK, before we go ANY further with this, I think we need to come to some sort of agreement here. How, exactly, are we defining "controversial"? CBFan (talk) 09:51, February 16, 2010 (UTC) :For one, I've actually not heard anyone besides you say anything about Bolt from the Blue deserving to win over Firestorm 2. How about we define the term 'controversial' as having more than one person talk about it. Typhoon 2 v Storm 2, Razer v Tornado and Judge Shred v Mute have all got many people on both sides, so they are controversial. Toon Ganondorf (t ''' 10:56, February 16, 2010 (UTC) ::Well then, you need to look deeper. I've seen it mentioned many times that Bolt From The Blue deserved the win. Why don't you watch the fight itself? Tell me that wasn't controversial. Besides, you're being inconsistant. CBFan (talk) 11:12, February 16, 2010 (UTC) :::I have watched the fight. Bolt from the Blue '''lifted Firestorm, who was the more aggressive and controlled, obviously deserved the win. Because you have now reverted my edit three times with no reason other than to keep my argument invalid, I am going to fully protect the page until this conversation has been settled. We probably need a three-revert rule on here, like Wikipedia does. Toon Ganondorf (t ''' 11:17, February 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::Oh, not this '''AGAIN, Toon Ganondorf. I thought you were better than this. I thought you'd overcome your silly habit of locking the page just to get "your way". Need I remind you, I wasn't the person to write that battle was controversial....Helloher was. Therefore, I'm not the only one. Firestorm also drove up BFTB's wedge a lot, that's not good control. It's close, and thus controversial. ::::Seriously, please stop assuming that it's just between you and me. Talk to Helloher about it. This is not YOUR Wikia, this is OUR Wikia. You did this with Scorpion, you did it AGAIN with Plunderbird, and you're doing it again now....this is a team effort. CBFan (talk) 11:20, February 16, 2010 (UTC) :::::Before this gets out of hand, I'd like to say I only put that on to start the page off. I couldn't think of any really good examples. If you guys want it to be removed, that's fine by me. Helloher (Death is not my phone number) 11:26, February 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::::No, we don't want it removed, we just need a definition of the word "controversial". A universal definition that we can all use. CBFan (talk) 11:29, February 16, 2010 (UTC) http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=5W2jMHUGods&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3D5W2jMHUGods This is just to show I'm not the only one. This is not to serve anything, only to prove that your claim that I am the only one is wrong. CBFan (talk) 11:35, February 16, 2010 (UTC) ::::I checked over the page you linked to, and I found five complainants - you, the actual driver of Bolt from the Blue, and three other. For obvious reasons, both you and the driver were disregarded in my final score. I now compare this to the 23 names I collected who believe that Bolt should have lost, which has already subtracted my own name. 7 of those names were on the page you linked, the rest were research that I conducted - yes, I contacted various roboteers and asked them of their opinion. Finally, please not Mark Joerger's statement - episodes were edited for viewing and it is unwise to base your opinions on what you see on TV. ::::Back to the actual stance I am making here - it is not ok for you to revert until you get your way. Back in January last year, I would let you revert just to end the needless arguments. It is not ok for you to revert, and I am now going to implement a single-revert rule, which will be punishable by a ban in future circumstances, no matter how many swear words, capital letters and insults you throw at me this time. Toon Ganondorf (t ''' 05:25, February 17, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I thought you were better than this, Toon Ganondorf. You've hit a real low here. I was trying to revert it back to how the page was like '''BEFORE the argument started, as I tried to do with Scorpion and Plunderbird, deliberately to keep it neutral. Yet on all three occasions, you edit back to yours, then lock it, as if you're insistant on having your own way.....no, that's not acceptable....and then to blame it on me... ::::::No, just....no. You haven't changed at all, Toon Ganondorf. We had a chance to get along. I actually thought we could be going somewhere with this. I tried to get along with you, I really did. But no, this little charrade proves to me that you don't care at all. You're using your mod powers JUST to get your OWN way, and that's not on in my book...I would have at least have gone back to the version BEFORE it started, BEFORE we had any problems...no, you just go to your one, then that's it. ::::::Also, I still find it remarkable you bring that quote up, but you STILL insist that Judge Shred vs Mute was controversial...even I know what really happened in that battle...Judge Shred was immobilised on one side much longer than you think. ::::::No, you know what....I've really had enough. I thought we could get along. My mistake. CBFan (talk) 07:40, February 17, 2010 (UTC) ::::If you pay attention for maybe five seconds, you'll notice that this isn't "my own way" - there is no one on your side, and no one on mine. Its not my fault that no one else has joined in on this conversation. If its one-on-one in an argument, the side who has proved their argument better takes precedent, and your only evidence has been to insult me. Toon Ganondorf (t ' 07:49, February 17, 2010 (UTC) Myra Wilson Is she the woman in this picture? http://users.aber.ac.uk/mxw/robotwars/series5/pit.jpeg 'Helloher (Death is not my phone number) 21:58, February 18, 2010 (UTC) :In fact, this is her website: http://users.aber.ac.uk/mxw/robotwars/robotwars.html Helloher (Death is not my phone number) 21:59, February 18, 2010 (UTC) ::It's claiming she was the judge for series 5. That picture was in Series 5. 08:56, February 19, 2010 (UTC) :::Well she did judge some of the battles, perhaps her and Mat Irvine or Martin Smith switched half way through filming perhaps? Also that picture of them in the pit really puts the size of the pit in perspective and the arena as well. Llamaman201 (talk) 11:06, February 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::Yeah, you can see her in place of Martin Smith during some of the Series 5 battles, but nobody seems to know why the judges changed between episodes. Christophee (talk) 14:12, February 19, 2010 (UTC) :::::I highly doubt the episodes were filmed in that order so if they did half each perhaps? Llamaman201 (talk) 15:14, February 19, 2010 (UTC) :::::I'd say its certainly her. Toon Ganondorf (t ' 20:23, February 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::::In Semi-Final 1, Myra and Martin appear, but Mat is absent. Come to think of it, was there any point in Series 5 where Myra wasn't a judge? 'TG (t ''' 02:41, June 6, 2010 (UTC) Roadblock vs Nemesis I'm sorry, but I don't think Roadblock-Nemesis was a judges decision. It wasn't referenced as one on the show, Nemesis had clearly lost, and, as far as I can see at least, the match was lost by default because the safety wasn't sufficient to allow Nemesis to burn for this long. I will wait before removing it however, as I expect to be contradicted. Matt(Talk) 16:18, June 25, 2011 (UTC) :Here is what lead me to believe it to be a judge's decision. *Nemesis was still moving and fighting back at the cease. *Jonathan Pearce cried "It '''could be all over for Nemesis now' at the cease. :However, I can't say for certain that it was a judge's decision. It certainly wasn't mentioned, no, nor were the judges seen deliberating. I believed that it was implied by the fact that Nemesis had not been immobilised and therefore it was required by the rules. Being an obvious decision, they chose not to advertise it. However, I'll see what the majority states. Toon Ganondorf (t ' 02:30, June 26, 2011 (UTC) ::I seem to remember, though, that the following year, when Mortis and Oblivion fought, there was no mention of the judges at all, despite both robots still being mobile - after "Cease", we immediately cut to "And the winner is Mortis"...and yet, also, back in Series 1, T.R.A.C.I.E. vs Skarab seemed to be painfully obvious, but it was advertised....so, if Roadblock vs Nemesis really WAS a judges decision, why advertise one obvious decision and not another? ::In truth, I don't think we'll ever really know anytime soon unless we can hear it from either Team Nemesis or Team Roadblock, or even anyone who was there at the time. CrashBash 15:34, July 20, 2011 (UTC) Discussion - Are some worth removing? Well, I think it says it all. Considering it's a relatively old page, maybe we should look them over, and try to figure out if anyreally significant ones can be added...conversely, if any can be removed. CrashBash (talk) 23:41, February 21, 2012 (UTC) :You mean judges' decisions? I'd say that there's really no need to list the "close" ones unless something else significant happened like the judges requesting to examine the robots themselves. As a general rule I'd be good for deleting any where the summary is nothing more than of the battle itself. 'RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 00:49, February 22, 2012 (UTC) ::I went over and culled all those that are not notable (first instance of ___, only time that ___), close (stated to be only one point apart, or required judge's inspection) or controversial (with overwhelming fan based opinion, or a complaint by the roboteer at the time ie Ultor/Big Brother, Mortis/Recyclopse). If anyone has other suggestions, please feel free to make them. Toon Ganondorf (t ''' 06:36, February 22, 2012 (UTC)` :::I understand where you're coming from, TG, but the idea of creating this section was to come to an agreement '''before we did anything. Besides, as I said, your choices of removal just feel....well, rather inconsistant. For example, you removed Firestorm 2 vs Bolt From The Blue, yet you didn't do anything regarding Ansgar vs Flensburger Power vs Nasty Warrior. To put it into perspective, the first one does at least have something for it. If you watch the decision, the audience clearly disagrees with it. I find this personally a little strange that the audience would take the side of the unseeded robot...point to make, it isn't just the BFTB captain who thought it was wrong. And alternatively, the German melee just doesn't fit at all. The reason why it was added in the first place was, and I quote... :::Yet in actual fact, the battle, quite clearly, shows that Nasty Warrior wasn't even remotely near Golem when it drove into Matilda. Hence the inconsistancy. The main reason for adding the decision in the first place is completely invalid and doesn't belong there. CrashBash (talk) 07:46, February 22, 2012 (UTC) Removed battles *Hypno-Disc vs Berserk 2 - not notable, controversial or close *Razer v Behemoth - not notable, controversial or close *Firestorm 2 vs Bolt from the Blue - not notable, controversial or close. A captain complaining that Firestorm were Uni students and they were children means nothing. *S3 vs Mousetrap - not notable, controversial or close *Shredder vs The Alien - not notable, controversial or close (I may reconsider this one if it is reworded) *Tornado vs Hypno-Disc - not notable, controversial or close *Thermidor 2 vs Mighty Mouse - not notable, controversial or close I welcome discussion on all above and on any others. Toon Ganondorf (t ' 08:00, February 22, 2012 (UTC) OK, my thoughts (in bold).... *Hypno-Disc vs Berserk 2 - not notable, controversial or close ('agreed) *Razer v Behemoth - not notable, controversial or close (what do you mean "not close?" It was a two-to-one split decision. You're not going to get any closer than that) *Firestorm 2 vs Bolt from the Blue - not notable, controversial or close. A captain complaining that Firestorm were Uni students and they were children means nothing. (No offence, but did you not read what I put earlier? The audience disagreed. Which, as I stated, is unusual considering the fact that they normally side the seeded robot. So, yes, it is notable) *S3 vs Mousetrap - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) *Shredder vs The Alien - not notable, controversial or close (I may reconsider this one if it is reworded) (I find this odd, considering when you ranted on Shredder, you clearly mentioned this one) *Tornado vs Hypno-Disc - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) *Thermidor 2 vs Mighty Mouse - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) I'd like to add my own list of judges decisions we could probably remove too. CrashBash (talk) 08:05, February 22, 2012 (UTC) My thoughts I'm thinking maybe these shouldn't be in there... *Roadblock vs Nemesis - Not really a judges decision. *Mousetrap vs Little Fly - What has been written about it doesn't do itself any favours. So it makes a kid cry...does that mean Stinger vs Hippobotamus is also notable? *X-Terminator 2 vs Behemoth - Not really that notable, controversial or close. *Firestorm 2 & Scorpion vs Bigger Brother & Plunderbird 4 - Not NCC *German Melee - As I said earlier, the main point for adding this in the first place is completely wrong. Definately needs removing. *Razer vs Bigger Brother - Hardly notable...it just kinda sounds like a "this battle sucks" fit to be honest. *Mute vs Roobarb - I don't even know why its here. Mute pretty much dominated the battle. Not NCC. Well? Thoughts are appriciated. CrashBash (talk) 08:12, February 22, 2012 (UTC) :Also think that Gi-Anto vs Micro-Mute vs Rampage 2 vs Whipper should be removed as it wasn't technically the result of a judges decision, and certainly there wasn't mention of one afterwards (the only thing afterwards was the post-mortum of the ravaged Micro-Mute). Controversial the act may have been, it had nothing to do with the judges. CrashBash (talk) 20:31, February 22, 2012 (UTC) RA2 Here's my call on all the ones discussed above. Some of them should be kept, but I'll grant that they need better wording. *Roadblock vs Nemesis - (First example of the match being stopped for safety reasons) *Hypno-Disc vs Berserk 2 - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) *Razer v Behemoth (Not the decision istelf but because they made a judgement call about Razer not being immobile on the grille) *Firestorm 2 vs Bolt from the Blue - (Decision was poorly justififed by the editing and the presenters. And the captain's complaints weren't just the differences in their education level, but also about the decision.) In looking back it wasn't enough of a runaway on BftB's behalf to make it highly controversial. *Shredder vs The Alien - not notable, controversial or close (I may reconsider this one if it is reworded) (How about this? "Example of how the judging criteria allowed for weaponless robots to win against weaponed ones.") *S3 vs Mousetrap - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) *Tornado vs Hypno-Disc - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) *Thermidor 2 vs Mighty Mouse - not notable, controversial or close (agreed) *German Melee -(If that's the truth, then agreed.) *X-Terminator 2 vs Behemoth (Was this the first seed to fall on a judges' decision? If not then agreed.) *Firestorm 2 & Scorpion vs Bigger Brother & Plunderbird 4 (agreed) Didn't realize it was the first tag team with all 4 alive. That's notable. *Razer vs Bigger Brother - (agreed) *Mute vs Roobarb - (agreed) In addition I have some that I think should be removed: *The Brute's Melee - Seems to only be written there because the other 3 were judges' decisions too. *Manta's Melee - Boring =/= close or controversial *S3 vs Wild Thing vs Spawn Again - Just a battle summary. RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 14:33, February 22, 2012 (UTC) If I may add a suggestion, how about Infinity vs. Infernal Contraption from the University Challenge? The battle wasn't that notable, nor was it particularly controversial, but it was very close. If that's not the kind of thing that justifies a mention on this page, then that's fine. [[User:ToastUltimatum|'Toast']][[User talk:ToastUltimatum|'Ultimatum']] 17:00, February 22, 2012 (UTC) ::Not really; I'd say "close" is the least important of the three criteria; when we list close batles here, we're looking for times where they talk about winning by a single point, or it being incredibly difficult to call.RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 17:17, February 22, 2012 (UTC) :If it's any consellation, RA2, I do agree that Roadblock vs Nemesis and Shredder vs The Alien could probably be reincluded by that basis. As for X-Terminator vs Behemoth...that's not technically correct. The first seed to fall by a judges decision was actually 101, to Dominator 2. CrashBash (talk) 17:34, February 22, 2012 (UTC) TG *On this logic, I'm happy to reinclude Shredder and The Alien and Razer and Behemoth if they can be rewritten. I do, however, disagree with your logic on Bolt from the Blue. The exact quote we found on Youtube from Proctor reads: **''We were robbed, if I (sic) do say so myself. Our weapon didn't break it ran out of air, we could only use it 5/6 times, plus we were 15/16 yrs old and they were university engineering graduates."'' **Being younger and having a weapon run out of air after five flips as opposed to breaking is not basis for making it a controversial decision. Maybe it was disagreed with, but it is certainly nowhere near the controversy of Typhoon/Storm or Mortis/Recyclopse. I just rewatched the battle, and unless they edited out some amazing displays of control, style, damage and aggression, the decision was just. *I also disagree with you on Gi-Ant-O, because Craig Danby told us himself that he was displeased with the decision. Unlike Bolt from the Blue, he had legitimate reasons in his statement and the battle was far closer. *Manta's melee is there because of what Mick Foley said after the battle. If no one believes that that is good enough, it can go. I agree that The Brute's melee can be removed. *German Melee I don't mind either way, it can be done on majority. *X-Terminator vs Behemoth - first time a top six seed lost a judge's decision in the heats. Not the first seed losing a judges decision. Its notable because it proves that the judges don't just put through the top tier robots. *S3 vs Wild Thing - very close decision as stated in the video. If reworded, I'd like it reincluded. *Say what you will about Roadblock v Nemesis, both survived to the end and so it was a judge's decision. That is all. *Mousetrap vs Little Fly - Agree, it can be removed. *Firestorm 2 & Scorpion - first Tag Team match to go to the judges, first time that its been necessary to judge two robots against two. That makes it notable in my opinion. *Mute v Roobarb can be removed if majority rules. Those are my thoughts, I hope they are considered just as I have considered others, rather than just voting on own whims. Thank you. Toon Ganondorf (t ''' 22:37, February 22, 2012 (UTC) :OK, let's look through them all again. *Firestorm 2 vs Bolt From The Blue - OK, fine, but still a bit odd that the crowd didn't like the idea of the '''seed going through. *Gi-Ant-O was not a judges decision. There was no hint of a judges decision. Did Danby SAY it was a judges decision? For all you've stated, he could have been talking about Refbot's decision. *Manta's Melee - Well, as I see it, surely it's exactly the same as Firestorm vs Bolt From The Blue. If one is included, the other must be, because in my mind, they're pretty much identical. If you're going to insist we can't have the former, then does it really make sense to insist the latter must stay? Just saying. *X-Terminator vs Behemoth - Fair enough, but surely the first judges decision to eliminate a seed proves that even more so, with 9th seed 101 losing to the unranked Dominator 2. X-Terminator was at least seeded. *S3 vs Wild Thing - Still don't see how it would work. I think it meerly shows Wild Thing's determination, which has already been mentioned countless times. *Roadblock vs Nemesis ended after about a minute. There was no mention of a judges decision. Yes, I know the various books say it was a judges decision, but we know how inaccurate they can be. How can you prove it was a judges decision? *Firestorm 2 & Scorpion vs Bigger Brother & Plunderbird 4 - Unless we're watching completely different battles, only Firestorm and Bigger Brother were still mobile. If you really want to make that claim, surely King B Powerworks & 101 vs Diotoir & Mega Morg would be a better option. :Other than that, fair game. CrashBash (talk) 21:17, February 24, 2012 (UTC) :::I'm sorry but I don't have to prove anything to you about Roadblock v Nemesis. The consensus says it was, you are the only person who thinks otherwise. That is not enough. And yes, Danby SAID it was a judge's decision. And I don't really care what you think of Firestorm 2/Scorpion etc's battle, it was still the first Tag Team judge's decision and its notable. Wild Thing and S3 is a close decision, it says so in the episode, and that trumps anything. :::Please stop using your opinion as fact, that is not the case. And do not remove anything else until we have consensus. Toon Ganondorf (t ' 23:05, February 24, 2012 (UTC) ::::Well then, where is the proof? Show me the proof. Or better, why don't you actually watch the battle? Does it say it was a judges decision? No. Cease is called in mid-battle, without a timer, and Jeremy Clarkson immediately says "And the winner is Roadblock". It doesn't even hint at a judges decision, there's nothing before or afterwards that says others, neither Team Nemesis or Bodmin Community College have said otherwise and the only place I could find that specifically said that Nemesis lost a judges decision clearly said Panic Attack was from Ipswich. I do not exactly call that trustworthy. The point I'm trying to make here is that I do not see any evidence suggesting that it was a judges decision to begin with, and unless you can come up with something conclusive then...sorry, it doesn't belong here. ::::As for the others, well...can you really blame me for doubting the Gi-Ant-O one when it isn't even mentioned in the episode? To make this work, there needs to be an explanation added. Otherwise it just comes across as not working. Because, if you watch the episode itself, it doesn't mention a judges decision at all. For Firestorm/Scorpion...well, does that mean we need to list Spikasaurus vs Dominator 2 vs Killerhurtz vs Suicidal Tendencies vs Stinger as being the first judges decision for an annihilator? By your logic, it must be, because it's "notable". Not every single special event's first judges decision can really be classed as "notable". Also, RA2 said that "closeness" is probably the "weakest" thread for notability. Craig Charles stated that Steel Avenger vs Shredder vs Trax was "controversial" (even though it clearly wasn't), but by your logic, that means we ''have to include it. I'm sorry, TG, but you're kinda missing the point. ::::Oh, and "Please stop using your opinion as fact, that is not the case. And do not remove anything else until we have consensus."....no offence, but you did exactly the same thing. I'm trying to stay calm and cival here, but, to repeat myself, this is a GROUP effort here, and we need to make it work as a group. Besides, you said "I don't have to prove anything to you about Roadblock v Nemesis." That's an opinion, so you can't use it as fact. Sorry, but you can't. CrashBash (talk) 23:27, February 24, 2012 (UTC) :::::Also, you said "Wild Thing and S3 is a close decision, it says so in the episode, and that trumps anything", yet Razer and Behemoth was also a close decision, it said so in the episode "It's a split decision, 2-to-1"...and yet you removed it, and stated it wasn't close. Why the inconsistancy? CrashBash (talk) 23:44, February 24, 2012 (UTC) On a different note, is "Mousetrap vs Sumpthing" worth noting? Although the House Robots did attack Sumpthing and pitted it, it was revealed in the episode that the judges were consulted afterwards, due to Mousetrap's immobility. Because Mousetrap was just about moving, they let it through. One of the few instances of the judges making a decision after the battle had supposedly been decided. CrashBash (talk) 23:29, February 24, 2012 (UTC) ::The reason I said Nemesis vs Roadblock was probably a judges' decision was because both robots were still mobile at the end. My logic was that they did the same thing they did with Gravity in S7 - judge the fight up to that point - but didn't bother to explain it to the audience. As for Mousetrap vs Sumpthing, Dig was acting a little too cheeky for me to believe he was actually objecting, and it was barely mentioned, so I don't know that I'd put it on the same pedestal as say Firestorm vs Te Morgue. '''RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 23:51, February 24, 2012 (UTC) :::Unfortunately, that's pretty much the key word "probably". We've pretty much had issues with this supposed "judges decision" from day 1...I always thought it was a judges decision until I actually watched the battle, and now I'm simply not sure. This whole uncertainty is the real issue here. CrashBash (talk) 00:00, February 25, 2012 (UTC) There are four clear issues, lets discuss them each below. Roadblock vs Nemesis For - The match ended without a clear winner, just as Clarkson had finished saying - Nemesis was not immobilised, as catching on fire has never since counted as an immobilisation. Against - Not explicitly stated to be a judge's decision. ---- Because of the uncertainty regarding whether or not it is a judges decision, I personally think it should be removed. CrashBash (talk) 00:00, February 25, 2012 (UTC) :True, but my thought was, there are only a few reasons that a still mobile robot would be declared eliminated, and all of them point to judges' intervention. RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 00:09, February 25, 2012 (UTC) :Personally I believe that RA2 is spot on, it was most likely considered up to the point where Nemesis caught fire. Uncertain to you does not mean uncertain in general, can we get more opinions on this? Toon Ganondorf (t ''' 00:08, February 25, 2012 (UTC) Wild Thing vs S3 '''For Against *There are much closer decisions out there. ---- There are much closer, and more notable, judges decisions out there. I wouldn't say it was controversial, and as mentioned before, better explained in Wild Thing's page. Remove. CrashBash (talk) 00:00, February 25, 2012 (UTC) Gi-Ant-O et all For Against ---- Kept, but needs to be explained that it was a judges decision, as this is not explained on the show itself. CrashBash (talk) 00:00, February 25, 2012 (UTC) Firestorm/Scorpion vs Bigger Brother/Plunderbird 4 For *The first decision where the acts of multiple robots were taken into account for a side winning. Against *Not any more notable than first annihilator decision. ---- Removed, not exactly any more notable than the first annihilator judges decision. CrashBash (talk) 00:00, February 25, 2012 (UTC) After rewatching the fight I see that we were dancing around the wrong reasons. I believe that if the summary goes something like this, it is a solid justification for it being there: First Tag Team Terror to end in a judges' decision. Despite being out of the match, Plunderbird and Scorpion's performances were taken into account. This would be contradicted by Lightning and Nasty Humphrey's Tag Team match in Extreme 2. RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 00:02, February 25, 2012 (UTC)